She was just mocking the MRA and anti-feminist movement, but of course they took the bait and immediately claimed she was a misandrist.

Sounds like you when you claim Slashdotters are Misogynists because they disagree with a woman. Never mind the fact that the woman can be wrong (you know that's actually a thing right ? That woman can in fact be wrong on some things, sometimes ? Just checking that you know the difference between "hatred" and "Disagreement with supporting evidence"...). The point is, "mocking" people will cause those people to react to you. That is exactly the description of Trolling.

So you say "she doesn't troll!" and then proceed to give an example where she trolls. Well good job on proving the point of the person you were replying to. Jessica Valenti is a no-talent Hack that threats The Guardian like her personal Turmblr blog.

I'm trying to make a reasoned argument, but you make absolute statements

False, I made a reasoned argument. You are the one making absolute statements. You made the statement it was because one gender is being institutionally repressed, and that it is due to systemic problems and social pressure. And we are supposed to accept that as FACT from you.

There is no reasoning with you, you are the same way on all these discussions. You literally bring the rageposts everywhere you go.

I don't know where the rage comes from exactly.

Look in the mirror. It comes from your polarizing language and you constant demeaning and assault on the current crop of IT/CS engineers, calling them "a problem" (aka, Brogrammer culture idiocy). Stop calling everyone who disagrees there even is a problem "part of the problem", and maybe you'll get more open mindedness.

People call you a SJW not because they disagree with you, but because you're an Internet Slacktivists who uses Social Justice to do Virtue Signaling, while constantly responding in an attempt at damage control in all these Gender/Race baiting article comment sections.

SJW is a pejorative for a bunch of blowhards who talk a lot of smack online, but don't do much IRL about Social Justice. And the posturing they do online is more sexist and racist (Color blindness, learn it, stop asking for seggration of "minorities" in "Safe spaces") than the "bigots" they are attacking.

Make a reasoned argument, not just concern trolling, and people will stop calling you a SJW. BTW : you'll have to accept meritocracy and human agency, so you'll have to accept that not everything needs to respect population quotas. STEM having 90% male is not wrong, as long as it's a choice made by all involved parties.

This is how things like the Wage Gap myth get started. Someone makes an observation about a niche or specific field, Internet Slacktivists blow it up into a "Applies to everyone, all the time" scenario.

In STEM, the ratio of women to men advantages MEN. In University in GENERAL, there are more women enrolled than there are men. There are more women graduating than men do.

It can be BOTH. And to answer Amimojo : No, we don't particularly care to know why women don't enroll in STEM, we assume it's because they aren't interested. The ones that are interested enroll and that's good enough for us.

Feminists in tech have been staging attempted “honey traps” to frame prominent male software developers for sexual assault, according to explosive claims on the blog of Eric S. Raymond, a pioneer of the open source movement. In allegations that will rock the world of software development, prominent targets included Linus Torvalds, creator of the Linux kernel

Raymond quoted excerpts from an online chat with a trusted source, who told him that the Ada Inititiative, a recently-discontinued feminist advocacy group in tech, was trying to “collect scalps” by concocting charges of attempted sexual assault against male software developers.

_KiTA_ writes: Open Source Pioneer Eric S. Raymond has revealed explosive allegations on his blog, claiming that he has a source with evidence that the Ada Initiative, a tech initiative designed to support women in open source, has been attempting to frame Linus Torvalds and other high profile members of the Linux and Open Source community for sexual assault. Linus has been noted for never being alone at conferences as of late, apparently this is a defensive move due to repeated attempts to "scalp" him — getting him alone and then immediately pushing a fake claim of sexual harassment or assault to either have him arrested or pulled off Linux development.

Don't take my word for it though, a quick google turns up the GG wiki and Reddit channel:

You linked GamerGhazi, and you're pretending that's THEIR reddit sub-reddit ? That reddit's sidebar mentions its sole purpose is mocking Gamergate, talk about a biased source. Are you even trying to hide your own bias ? Do you think we're idiots ?

She was making a wider point about games that were overtly misogynistic

How can games be misogynistic ? Games are not sentient, and as such cannot "Hate women because they are women".

Plus what's misogynistic about boobs or equal opportunity slaughter of both genders ? I don't get what "hatred of women" there is in shooting both genders equally, or showing off a man's pecs or a woman's boobs equally.

Anita is just using her early tele-seminar scam skills in a new industry to make money. Basically, if you contributed to her Kickstarter (which she has failed to deliver on) or donated to her non-profit, you got scammed.

That's the Link. The top banner uses a screenshot of the game in question, the name of the Article is a play on the name of the Game. It's by Nathan Grayson, the responsible party, there is no disclosure, and the game is mentionned in the opening Paragraph with only 2 other games out of the list of 50.

That is the coverage at issue, people were simply asking why there was no disclosure of Nathan's relationship with DQ's developer.

Can we stop pretending it was a "review" and that "it doesn't exist" when it's still up, linked from Deepfreeze and available for all to see ?

You're advocating Culturecide. Bro culture is fine. Wanting guys not to act like guys is what is wrong. This is why people are upset when you walk into a room and tell them not to use.bro as a 3 letter extension for Brotli, because it has nothing to do with the "Guys being Guys", but you're making it sound like it does. Then you claim "Guys being Guys" is toxic, to a room full of guys. And you're surprised they get upset.

Stop assuming everything is about your feminist agenda..Bro has nothing to do with "Bro culture" in the first place, never has, never will. The only reason it does, is because self-proclaimed WRA want it to be so they can test their control over others using shaming language like "Misogyny". How does Bro even relate to Hatred of Women ?

It's in the title. Misogyny. The hatred of all women. No one is over-sensitive, that's what the word means. How did you miss that ? Or do you not even know what Misogyny means anymore (to be fair, online feminist activists have twisted it to mean "disagreeing with a woman", but I digress...) ?

I mean, Bathrooms and Changing rooms have to do with Lady parts vs Man parts, but I'm not clear on what CLEAR reason you see for Introductory CS classes... Last I checked (and I admit my introductory CS classes were about 20 years ago), there was no genital involvement.

That's basically what it is. Computers didn't come into their own as a "Thinkerer" field until the early 80s. By that time, most degrees had gone to women, and you were still seeing that population into the early 90s.

The shift in degrees occurred early/mid-80s with the release of the PC platform and Home computers, these things don't happen in the span of a few days. It takes years to change a trend like that in emerging fields. In the 90s, when I did my Comp Sci classes, we had like 80% of our teachers being women, while 90% of the class were guys.

Why is it so hard to accept that maybe women in general don't prefer the field, just like men in general don't prefer nursing ?